Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Docken

Montana Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1995No. 95-128Published

1DissentJustice Trieweiler

I dissent from the majority opinion which uses semantic smoke and mirrors to ignore the plain language of § 46-18-203, MCA. The role of this Court in the construction of a statute is simply to ascertain and declare what is in terms or in substance contained therein, not to insert what has been omitted. Section 1-2-101, MCA.

As we correctly concluded in State v. Downing (1979), 181 Mont. 242, 593 P.2d 43, Section 95-2206(6), RCM (1947) (current version at § 46-18-203, MCA), simply does not provide the option of reimposing a second suspended sentence after a first suspended sentence has been…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. OppeltMontana Supreme Court · 1979
  2. State v. DowningMontana Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Speldrich v. McCormickMontana Supreme Court · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API